Saturday, May 14, 2016

Last week, Harvard announced that they were cracking down on “privilege” within their student community by banning members of single-gender organizations from holding school leadership positions.

But when Harvard announced its new policy, it stressed that the sanctions applied to both male and female single-gender organizations equally, since both male and female single-gender organizations thrived on their “privilege.”

Harvard’s resident feminists claim that all-female organizations, while just as gender-biased, are beneficial to the school’s community, whereas all-male organizations are merely breeding grounds for the present and future perpetrators of sexual crime.

On Monday, they demonstrated, accusing Harvard of, among other things, perpetuating the marginalization of female voices. “My women’s organization has been more than a social organization,” one student told the Boston Globe. “It has been a mental health respite, a place to discuss sexual assaults . . . where I became a feminist, and where I refound my voice.”

The students claimed that female-only clubs were more important than male-only clubs because women experience systematic oppression, and they repeated claims that such clubs were necessary because women “earn less” than male counterparts and because women are “targeted and shamed” for their sexuality.

Stop falling for appeals to equality. You might as reasonably be persuaded by appeals to unicorns, lumberjacks, or the Labor Theory of Value. Even those who make appeals to equality observably don't believe in it.

77 Comments:

I discovered the word "pathological altruism" at this site. Give the opium dens their opium, turned out how well for the Chinese? Give them "their rights". Their hard earned entitlements. Their compensation. Their victim status till the end. Then seal them in.

No, there's a special section where they can lead all they like. They can be kings, queens, Emperors, even garden gnomes. They can dress up or down or never get out of bed. Their rights are guaranteed and everyone nods and smiles at them. And backs away.

Had they live in a "patriarchal world", where their fathers mold their values and backbones, they would not make a ridiculous claim that a rule that treat male and female equally is a rule to make women feel "targeted and shamed" for their sexuality. Being feminine is not shameful, you fool. Being in university, Harvard no less, but cannot use your cerebral cortex properly is.

The spoiled little bitches of Haahvahd need Mohammed's men to teach them a lesson or five about the real meaning of "patriarchy". The irony is, they'd probably enjoy it. That's where they need to be resettling ISIS "refugees". Princess Fauxcahontas should set up a wigwam in the middle of Haahvahd sqaiyah for them.

Mr. Mantra Man:The gals should double down. If they want to destroy their legitimacy then this former conservative will help them as I can.

You vastly underestimate the power of their lie. When Femen high-priestess Gloria Steinem defended Beelzebubba with the "one-free grope" dispensation in the wake of l'affaire Lewinsky, all feminist arguments basically 'jumped the shark' - the dispensation standing as absolute proof that the whole thing was a massive pile of bullshit. That was two decades ago. Has there been any reduction in the power of feminism in the maggot-encrusted carcass of western societies? On the contrary, their power is greater than ever. In the EUSSR, feminists are all lined up in favor of the Musloid invasion. In a sane world, they would be laughed out of existence.

What can I say Kong but the conservatives who stood in the way of fems were actually what propped up that bit of theater, as conservatives are wont to do.

Hopefully the alt-right undermines the legitimacy instead of playing their part in the political theater, think George Will sitting there pondering the rhetoric of a Lefty as the second coming of Aristotle (we better take that shit seriously) Myself I will take Gavin Mccinnes over George Will.

Thinking operationally, we live in the Jim Jones cult, now a conservative would want an intellectual debate with Jones, the usual routine, the usual fail but feel good about being "smart" routine that conservative leaning people have accepted for decades.

Here is the thing, we stand outside the compound as it descends into rule by the craziest and basically just state the obvious, "They are all crazy and do any of you want to go home?"

From there the cult begins its disintergration. Trump calls it "Making America Great Again."

Last week, Harvard announced that they were cracking down on “privilege” within their student community by banning members of single-gender organizations from holding school leadership positions.

Operation Chaos opportunity here! Just have all male organizations except transgender weirdos, boom no women will ever admit to that, and the number of trans at Harvard is probably low. Now you are a multi gendered organization and you can hold leadership positions.

When you consider how skillfully this Harvard pronouncement outed the grasping illogic of campus feminists, you have to wonder whether some closeted and sympathetic super genius dean lurks in the high offices behind the Ivy Curtain in Cambridge.

Hoisted by their own petards, they will de-legitimize themselves into obscurity. The trick, for those with long time preferences, is staying ahead of the expanding event horizon. Be careful what you wish for, ladies.

I work in the government sector, I have seen numerous organizational mission briefings that tout diversity as if it is part of the mission. Recently I had a surprisingly positive experience. An Army civilian woman briefed her organization's personnel and hiring program. It was 100% about performance and attracting top talent from leading universities in technical and engineering fields. Not one word or suggestion of diversity in her presentation. No one else at the organization mentioned diversity either. They were an adequately diverse group but very aggressive and mission focused.

Since diversity is still big elsewhere, and this woman oversees HR for an organization with thousands of employees, I optimistically wonder whether this organization is somehow post-diversity in their mission outlook.

I have the mixed blessing to work for a large US-domiciled corporate (~60,000 people).

The HR department are hopeless at doing anything useful like hiring or organising other necessary affairs, but every day they inundate us with bullshit about the wonders of diversity.

What always fascinates me about it is that they openly tout that their measure of success is increasing female and/or other "victim class du jour" proportion within the company, but I have never seen them highlight the performance of the company itself as a measure of their success.

"That reminds me of a friend, who is a woman. She doesn't like having a female boss because it's "unnatural.""

Even my female friends don't like female managers. There are probably some good ones around, but the female managers they have to deal with either treat then like kids and micro-manage them until to death, or spend all their time trying to build 'consensus' when all the workers really want is for the manager to make a damn decision like they're paid to do.

Every female friend who's expressed a preference is much happier working for a male boss.

What is pathetic is that the male orgs don't even take time to protest the protesters: "Shut up and be equal" is such an easy sign.

Are there any shitlords at Harvard? Most of the "men" are liberal; the "conservatives" are doubtless of the white-knighting "women civilize men" Jonah Goldberg type.

An Army civilian woman briefed her organization's personnel and hiring program. It was 100% about performance and attracting top talent from leading universities in technical and engineering fields. Not one word or suggestion of diversity in her presentation.

Did she have the magic shield of Africa as well as the magic shield of Woman?

the female managers they have to deal with either treat then like kids and micro-manage them until to death,

Last week I saw a printed email in the common printer from some female manager telling her minions that if they weren't at their desks at 8am sharp they had to notify her and explain why they weren't there. I thought geez I'm glad I'm not working for that bitch.

“It has been a mental health respite, a place to discuss [perhaps fantasize about Shades of Grey style] sexual assaults . . . where I became a feminist, and where I refound my [shrill shrill] voice.”

“targeted and shamed”

But...when it comes to losing a "safe space" and being targeted at Target suddenly they lose their "voice". Because normal, possibly Christian housewives who fear sexual harassment are just a bunch of phobic dipshits...or something. Because you see it's totally reasonable for a woman to fear rape and death after hearing a fork and dongle joke in a stadium full of tech nerds but if a normal, possibly Christian/Nazi woman feels flimsy peekaboo curtains and American style stalls aren't safe spaces for mixed company...well. They're dipshits, fit only for scorn and mockery and all the shame a shrill shrill feminist can muster.

Again, EVERY WORD they say is A LIE including 'and' and 'the'.

I'm working on a meme. Topic: Target rape rooms. I've Photoshopped the text off the Calvin Klein upskirt ad. What to put? "...meanwhile in a bathroom at Target." ??? Steves? Anybody?

Oh, happy days! If anyone in the world needs their privilege checked, it's the entire student body of Harvard. An acceptance letter from Harvard is an express ticket to the upper echelons of politics, business, academia, and the media, yet they still won't stop whining.

this woman oversees HR for an organization with thousands of employees, I optimistically wonder whether this organization is somehow post-diversity in their mission outlook

"What do you mean we can't fire the guy who said they are just hookers he picked up trying to shake him down for mo money, after 2 ER patients claimed he sexually assaulted them, we just fired a white female nurse last week for no reason"

I've Photoshopped the text off the Calvin Klein upskirt ad. What to put? "...meanwhile in a bathroom at Target." ??? Steves? Anybody?

"As long as one man in a wig is denied access to little girls bathrooms the leftists fight against the 1% can wait." The funny thing is liberals will agree with it.

Rantor wrote:I work in the government sector, I have seen numerous organizational mission briefings that tout diversity as if it is part of the mission. Recently I had a surprisingly positive experience. An Army civilian woman briefed her organization's personnel and hiring program. It was 100% about performance and attracting top talent from leading universities in technical and engineering fields. Not one word or suggestion of diversity in her presentation. No one else at the organization mentioned diversity either. They were an adequately diverse group but very aggressive and mission focused.

Since diversity is still big elsewhere, and this woman oversees HR for an organization with thousands of employees, I optimistically wonder whether this organization is somehow post-diversity in their mission outlook.

Maybe, but it's site by site. Some units have tasted the poison and rejected it, even though they mouth the words in praise when the higher-ups wander in. Many see that diversity (quota, not candidate pool) destroys efficiency and makes the work place a horrid place to be over time.

@36 Rantor Since diversity is still big elsewhere, and this woman oversees HR for an organization with thousands of employees, I optimistically wonder whether this organization is somehow post-diversity in their mission outlook.---

They say that an ivy league education used to elicit admiration and respect, instead of pity and contempt.

That's what I think, except for the pity part. I've worked with a lot of Ivy League grads over the years. Most did more harm than good - they bring their Insider Club politics to the org and destroy it.

The sooner we stop sending any kids with potential there and ruining them, the better.

Godfrey:"Feminism" was a con. It was a scam to destroy motherhood. and femininity.Working 50 years in a corporate cubical isn't "liberation". It's corporate serfdom.

We all get "raped" daily by taxation and the monetary fiat scam. That's true systematic oppression.

Absolutely. not just feminism either (that's only one branch of the poison-tree), but the whole tree of equality - root and branch and leaf alike. All a massive con. Ask any cuck why is it that "super-capitalists" like the (((Warburg))) banking cartel paid for Lenin and (((Trotsky))) to overthrow the Kerensky government (keep in mind, the Tsar was already out) and they just give you this blank, dumbfounded look. It doesn't compute. Why would the arch-bizniss mogul (((Armand Hammer))) be supporting the Bolsheviks who abolished private property? Guess not everyone's property was taken - there were looters and those who were looted. The whole damned thing is a con, and has been from the start. Anyone who expects Con, Inc. to oppose any aspect of it is utterly blind, or worse.

They should go back to teaching civics in high school. Stupid statements like the above tells us that.

Equality is a moral and legal concept, which the data gleaned from DNA say exactly nothing about. One man is smart and another is dumb; one is tall and another is short; one calm and the other excitable. In these things, men differ.

One man's life is sacred, a gift from God, and not to be taken from him, by murder or slavery, but the taker forsake his own life. And so is every other man's life, born or unborn.

We have seen the rich and famous, whose skin was the proper hue, men like OJ Simpson, get away with murder. Any poor, obscure, or white man committing the same crime would have been punished. Is this the inequality our DNA proclaims? The the rich can break laws we must obey? Inequality is not so attractive when seen in its true proportion.

No man was born with a saddle on his back to be the beast of burden of another man born with spurs on his heels. All men are born as sons of God, and of the same rank, not master and servant.

That is what the word equality means. Those who misuse the word in this absurdly tin-eared way, whether the misuse is intentional or not, aid in the attempt to make human life less sacred in our eyes.

Such talk demeans the public discourse and aids the enemy.

Even the barbaric Mohammedan has a clearer understanding of the word 'equality' -- for do not all the heretics following that false prophet bow and pray to their satanic god at the same hours, regardless of social status, give the same to the poor, and recite the same book? Not even Allah is a respecter of persons: is anyone born into the West less well informed than a make-believe devil?

I have a good female friend who got a job under a woman boss and said, rather matter-of-factly, "Of course I'll have to watch out for her trying to sabotage me." Women know women are horrible to work for; they just never think it through to the obvious conclusion.

As to diversity, I have a fun game I like to play: ask people to explain the benefits of diversity without using the words "diversity" or "diverse" in their answer.

There is a Yes Minister element of giving legbeards a 'voice' as in 'let Little Kayla sing her song from the play so she can have her milk and cookies and go to bed, and we can continue our bridge game.'

There is a thick binder of bullshit I picked up today at a political convention sitting on my couch. (The boss is a neurosurgeon, but not Ben Carson. Think Pepsi.) However you just have to bite your tongue and smile to get bigger things done.

Can someone please explain if those red balls they have out front are supposed to be bremer walls or someone's idea of a joke? Never got a chance during the five minutes they set up their Three Card Monty table here.